Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 25 Apr 2001 17:43:34 +0100
From:      Oliver Cook <ollie@uk.clara.net>
To:        Ian Dowse <iedowse@maths.tcd.ie>
Cc:        freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: open (vfs_syscalls.c:994) && NFS
Message-ID:  <20010425174333.D38996@mutare.noc.clara.net>
In-Reply-To: <200104251643.aa54332@salmon.maths.tcd.ie>; from iedowse@maths.tcd.ie on Wed, Apr 25, 2001 at 04:43:31PM %2B0100
References:  <20010425160657.B38996@mutare.noc.clara.net> <200104251643.aa54332@salmon.maths.tcd.ie>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Apr 25, 2001 at 04:43:31PM +0100, Ian Dowse wrote:
> In message <20010425160657.B38996@mutare.noc.clara.net>, Oliver Cook writes:
> >However, the more noticeable problem was the processes stuck in
> >nfsvin because of the broken directory entry. Have you any ideas
> >as to what would be causing that particular problem which is
> >plaguing our servers more than the vmopar problem?
> 
> The processes stuck in "nfsvinval" are just a side-effect of the
> vmopar problem; they should go away too when you upgrade. I forget

That's a relief to know! :)

> I haven't seen any evidence of the broken directory entries you
> mention - maybe you're reading too far into the struct nameidata
> fields in "nd". It may be normal for some fields to be uninitialised
> or point at junk data.

There is no evidence; our first idea was that it was a broken
directory entry, and after your subsequent revelation I still
had it in my head that this was the problem! :) We have
confirmed that this is not the case, thankfully!

Thanks for your help.

Ollie

-- 
Oliver Cook    Systems Administrator, ClaraNET
ollie@uk.clara.net      020 7903 3000 ext. 291

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010425174333.D38996>